I occasionally wonder about the attention paid to particular Magic players.
I have a few moments to spare so I flipped on SCG a moment ago to see if there is a Legacy tournament this weekend. There was this long segment on "players to watch", some of whom had good records, but others were like 4-4. Then they went into player circuit points and such.
I give exactly zero shits about any of that. I consider everything related to exalting players to be just an annoyance that I have to endure if I want to keep up with the game. I wonder (out loud for the first time) if that is just me or if this is a common perception. I have always figured that I was alone in my distaste for celebrity Magic player (who at least earn their celebrity as opposed to general celebrities - why is Paris Hilton on magazine covers exaclty?) status. The players themselves, I do not mind in the least. I just am aware that the elevation is a function of stuff like the pro tour which in turn exists to sell more cards. I am reminded about this when I sit down in front of a guy in the the win-and-in round of a SCG and I realize that he went something like 3-1-1 to get there while I am playing in my ninth round. He just got invited with three byes because...well just because.
I'm pretty good at this game, ya know. I have been involved in the tournament scene for longer than just about every player I see out there, though few of you know my name. High profile players still have to read my cards when I can actually make it to a tournament. I wonder if I have a big head because I have so much history. I never quite made the leap to traveling though, so maybe I am sore about the choices I have made and I am just bitter in some deep dark place. I honestly do not know.
I just know that there is a lot of self-serving lip service being paid out there. How do the rest of you feel about it?
EDIT: Ah, this probably belongs in community
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
"Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
"Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
"Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."
The primary focus of the Players to Watch segment (especially at this point) is to comment on players who are in the running for spots in SCG's Player Championship tournament; they are players who have had success on the Open circuit, so they are to some degree known quantities. I don't really care about any particular players myself, but keeping the audience up to date on players who are trying to qualify for the season ending event is a reasonable thing to do, IMO.
Originally Posted by nedleeds
Don't worry Finn, you are on the "The Source" players to watch leaderboard :)
Also the "People Who Actually Created Their Own Deck" leaderboard.
Next Atlanta open we'll hijack the stream and just show you how all of Team Tusk is doing instead
There's commonly turnover in the player base here, just as I would imagine is the case in other areas. People enter the format, play two or three years, then go off and do other things. Maybe they come back; maybe they don't. Rarer are the people who play a format for five or 10 years or longer. Those of us in the latter camp remember each other. The people who are new to the Northwest or new to the format don't know you unless you're putting up high-profile results or hear stories about you from format veterans. I have lots of stories I relate about you from time to time. You had an insane tear with Survival of the Fittest. That right there is part of at least two or three stories.
I agree with 100% of everything you said and feel 100% the same way.
Especially having played this format and its predecessor before some of these players were even born.
I feel the same way Finn. I give zero fucks about the players themselves. It's all 'bout dem cards yo.
"We are goblinkind, heirs to the mountain empires of chieftains past. Rest is death to us, and arson is our call to war."
SCG Opens don't award byes or "invites," what are you possibly talking about? There have been plenty of times I recall seeing "players to watch" dropping at 2-3 or something.
They used to award byes but stopped. Rumor was that this was because having byes allowed you to go infinite because you never have to play against a random spoiler deck.
They award points which are good for invites to the invitational and their players championship.
I guess it depends on who you consider high profile.
I do admire great legacy players, and notice their results and placing. The decks they play and how those develop.
Without sounding like a total fanboi (even if thats to late in about 3 seconds) I particularly peek in on LeJays performance, since he is a very good player, deckbuilder and has a good grasp on the meta, moreso than you (yes whoever the heck you are reading this) -and I follow the guys i travel with and communicate with online, since i obviously consider them very good players. (Einherjer, Julian23, Bahra, Tomas Vleck).
Is that bad? Are good players not deserving of admiration?
Im motivated when someone contacts me, asking for a recent list or giving input on my latest deck development, particuarly because I know, that they see my hard work and ability that goes into that progress.
That said, I dont give a crap who SCG is promoting.
"Brainstorm and Fetchlands are interesting although I don't know if Brainstorms alone are worth it right now, because Stifle is a common card. " -Peddi 2015.
Featuring players is all about selling the dream. Segments about players aren't for people who only care about a format. You are in a minority.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
I only heard about the finals of the modern portion, do you know how many turned out for legacy?
I follow the players who play decks I'm interested in, but that is hardly ever relevant, because I just want to watch the boss Ross play in the finals with infect, or seeing UWR in the finals with a good pilot
Using Tapatalk
No, we split the top 4, and the semifinals matches determined who received the Volcanic Islands. I made it to the finals and won Game 1, then got crushed in the next two. Big Red is a deck.
There were 59 of us for Legacy.
I don't care about Magic: Paris Hilton, and I dislike the wannabes who consider themselves demigods just because they win a Volcanic worth of cards twice per month, an amount of money I'll earn by sticking a thumb in my nostril for two night shifts on average weekend.
Don't care for the celebs because they never play decks I like or find interesting, but it is nice to have something to follow since I care even less for team sports.
Last edited by snorlaxcom; 11-10-2014 at 03:06 PM.
It has to do with the streaming strategy that StarCity is doing as well. They are building up these players as heroes to watch on the SCG streams. They had that huge three part article series where they layout how to improve the poor streaming for themselves and magic as a whole. The players championship was part of that in order to create these high profile magic players.
I feel the same way as you Finn, but will cheer on high profile players that are known for playing the archetypes that I enjoy. Or Joe Lescott since I know he is semi-frequent Sourcer.
Ask Obama for a Magic: The Gathering subsidy while being dressed in pajamas.
It was chinese handcuffs ... you got byes in the fist couple rounds and the last two rounds were scoop fests ... they had to win all of like 4 rounds. It was kind of demotivating for a non SCG barnacle to show up to play, you were just automatically in the hole.
Exactly this and I completely agree.
I feel like a lot of the true experts in this format have careers that prevent them from topping enough tournaments to be "known".
I mean, look, I have nothing against people trying to succeed. But as a competitor, it seems like some folks are doing it to get noticed as opposed to letting their play speak for itself.
You can be good at this game - great, in fact - and not be considered a "pro." Being good at Magic in every aspect of the game (including good sportsmanship and proper etiquette) can actually make you a better, smarter person with improved decision-making skills. It also helps you exercise patience. I think those intangibles make the game stand out more as a tool for true professional success outside of the game - instead of considering the game itself as a profession.
Agreed.
I know a portion of what little success I've been able to manage was helped by what I learned playing this game.
Honestly as a "pro" mtg player you are barely upper middle class at the top end of the spectrum in terms of income anyway. This is a hobby, it's a diversion. Be amazing in life, then worry about success in magic.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote